SEX, LIES, AND FLUID DEFINITIONS

Yesterday, November 15th, ICANN Chairman Vint Cerf stated otherwise, apparently as unconcerned with the ByLaws as the ALSC itself: "We do have intentions to move on the Report in this afternoon's meeting," he confirmed replying publicly to ex-ICANN Chair/current At Large Study Committee member Esther Dyson's smarmy ploy for immediate Board approval of the ALSC Report.

Further into the public meeting, Dr. Cerf was good enough to read aloud my remotely posted question seeking clarification of this obvious contradiction, "whether referring to the "basics" or the details of the Report," between Lynn's statement, and his own.

"I meant to say that the subject would come up in the afternoon Board meeting," Cerf adlibbed, "not that we would make a final decision on the ALSC Report."

Yet what "came up" at the afternoon Board meeting was not "the subject" but an already prepared formal ALSC Resolution, "that the President and CEO is directed, in consultation with the ALSC, to begin ... planning for carrying out an At Large election process in 2002 consistent with the recommendations contained in the ALSC Final Report..." .

Now, ICANN can split hairs all it wants over the meaning of "final decision," but the artifice is all too reminiscent of President Clinton's fluid definition of "sex."

It's all wet. And you get screwed.

Background

When Commerce first sought to transition Domain Name System management to a publicly accountable “bottoms up” private organization, ICANN pledged to create an open membership structure to assure public oversight and public input. ICANN promised to create an “At Large” membership which would directly elect 9 members of the Board, as a counterweight to the 9 directors elected by the industry-based Supporting Organizations. See Letter of Esther Dyson, Interim Chair, to J. Beckwith Burr November 6, 1998. That letter contained the following promise from the ICANN Board:

"Some remain concerned that the Initial Board could simply amend the bylaws and remove the membership provisions that we have just described above. We commit that this will not happen. In addition to our commitment, the U.S. government has publicly stated that it will maintain oversight during the transition period, and we fully expect that the creation of a membership and the transfer of authority to a fully elected Board will occur before that transition period ends." (emphasis added)

On the basis of this among other obligations, the Department of Commerce entered into a cooperative agreement with ICANN.

ICANN repeatedly promised that establishment of an open membership, direct elections, and the resignations of the initial Board members were it’s “top priority.” See, e.g., Letter of Esther Dyson to J. Beckwith Burr, July 19, 1999. In particular, Esther Dyson again assured the Department of Commerce (and the Internet community as a whole) on behalf of ICANN that:

"Our goal, which I know you share, is to replace each and every one of the current Board members as soon as possible." (emphasis added)

ICANN made similar pledges to Congress. In sworn testimony before the Congressional oversight hearing on July 22, 1999, Dyson testified:

"As to the second wave, it is ICANN's highest priority to complete the work necessary to implement a workable At-Large membership structure and to conduct elections for the nine At-Large Directors that must be chosen by the membership. ICANN has been working diligently to accomplish this objective as soon as possible. The Initial Board has received a comprehensive set of recommendations from ICANN's Membership Advisory Committee, and expects to begin the implementation process at its August meeting in Santiago. ICANN's goal is to replace each and every one of the current Initial Board members as soon as possible.(emphasis added)

Testimony of Esther Dyson, Chair, ICANN, before the House Commerce Committee, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, July 22, 1999.

Then just one month later, in August 1999, the initial Board members extended their terms another year, and adopted a resolution to prohibit direct elections of directors by the At Large membership. See Santiago ICANN Board Resolutions.

In March 2000, ICANN finally created a mechanism for a general membership, but it would only allow the election of five of the promised nine At Large directors. See ICANN Board Resolutions. In addition, the Board again extended the terms of initial Board members, allowing four of them to remain on the Board until October 2001.

In August 2000, the Board adopted a resolution calling for a "clean sheet" study of the At Large membership, bringing us to today. Among the members of ICANN's At Large Study Committee, the now ex-chair of ICANN, Esther Dyson.

The subsequent At Large Study Committee Final Report recommends six At Large members and 12 industry members, effectively neutering public participation and any hint of democracy in Internet governance. ICANNWatch dissects the At Large Study Committee Final Report here, noting among other things, that it relies on argument by assertion; it is arbitrary, dishonest, naive, vague and exclusionary.

It is also widely rejected worldwide.

In contrast, an independent NGO and Academic ICANN Study (NAIS) was simultaneously conducted by experienced researchers from nine organizations worldwide with substantial expertise in ICANN. (See IF YOU CAN COUNT, ITS A NO-BRAINER.) It was well received by a broad range of Internet constituencies. And ignored by ICANN.

Copyright © 1995 - 2007 ICB. Inc. All rights reserved. "ICB Toll Free News" is a trademark of ICB Inc. ICB Inc. assumes no responsibility for use or misuse of information contained herein and / or accessible via this site. ICB Inc. cannot and does not vouch for the accuracy and / or usability of any of the contained or linked-to information, and assumes no responsibility for any errors or omissions.